Memo from Hershkoff to Counsel Re: Jencks Memo; from Lado to Chambers Re: Attorneys Fees

Correspondence
September 17, 1990

Cite this item
Memo from Hershkoff to Counsel Re: Jencks Memo; from Lado to Chambers Re: Attorneys Fees preview

2 pages

Cite this item

  • Case Files, Sheff v. O'Neill Hardbacks. Memo from Hershkoff to Counsel Re: Jencks Memo; from Lado to Chambers Re: Attorneys Fees, 1990. f7df0dac-a146-f011-877a-002248226c06. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/d1861927-b5f7-4380-b408-ed032503732a/memo-from-hershkoff-to-counsel-re-jencks-memo-from-lado-to-chambers-re-attorneys-fees. Accessed August 10, 2025.

    Copied!

    National Headquarters 

132 West 43 Street 

New York, NY 10036 

  

  

(212) 944-9800 

Norman Dorsen 
PRESIDENT 

MEMORANDUM Ira Glasser 
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 

Eleanor Holmes Norton 
CHAIR 

TO: Sheff Team NATIONAL ADVISORY COUNCIL 

i Helen Hershkoff 
FROM: Helen Hershkoff# % ion 

DATE: September 17, 1990 

3 Christopher Jencks 

  

Enclosed is a law student memo summarizing critiques of 
Christopher Jencks' Inequality. The articles are on file at the 
ACLU. A memo on Jencks' more recent book is also being prepared 
and will be distributed as soon as it is available. 

 



  

  

MEMORANDUM 

To : Julius LeVonne Chambers 

From : Marianne Lado 

Date : September 6, 1990 

Re : Attorneys Fees in Sheff v. O'Neill 
  

Enclosed please find a copy of Doe Vv. State of 
Connecticut, a decision rendered by the Connecticut Supreme Court 
in July, 1990. Wesley Horton, who argued Doe and is LDF co- 
counsel in Sheff, interprets Doe as precluding an award of 
attorneys fees in our case. 

  

  

In Doe, the Connecticut court concluded that the first 
article, §10 of the state constitution, which provides, "All courts 
shall be open, and every person, for an injury done to him . . 
shall have remedy . . .," does not create a right to attorney's 
fees. 216 "Conn. 85, . 106 (1990). The court, further, rejected 
arguments for the adoption of a "private attorney general" doctrine 
or "substantial benefit" standard for the award of attorney fees. 
216 Conn. at 108-109. Plaintiffs in Sheff have no other 
independent statutory basis for an award of fees. 

Please let me know if Doe raises any questions. 

MEL A¢E€A4 

MEL: ja 

Enclosure 

co : Steve Ralston 

Ron Ellis V

Copyright notice

© NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.

Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

Return to top